From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 2969 invoked by alias); 11 May 2012 20:58:26 -0000 Received: (qmail 2960 invoked by uid 22791); 11 May 2012 20:58:26 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-6.4 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,KHOP_RCVD_UNTRUST,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,SPF_HELO_PASS,T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (209.132.183.28) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Fri, 11 May 2012 20:58:12 +0000 Received: from int-mx10.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx10.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.23]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id q4BKwAlK023218 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Fri, 11 May 2012 16:58:10 -0400 Received: from barimba (ovpn01.gateway.prod.ext.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.9.1]) by int-mx10.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id q4BKw9MJ004042 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Fri, 11 May 2012 16:58:09 -0400 From: Tom Tromey To: Eli Zaretskii Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: [RFA] Completion of add-inferior References: <83pqaay5b3.fsf@gnu.org> <87txzmxye6.fsf@fleche.redhat.com> <83obpuxwr4.fsf@gnu.org> Date: Fri, 11 May 2012 20:58:00 -0000 In-Reply-To: <83obpuxwr4.fsf@gnu.org> (Eli Zaretskii's message of "Fri, 11 May 2012 23:56:15 +0300") Message-ID: <87fwb6xwny.fsf@fleche.redhat.com> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.0.95 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2012-05/txt/msg00456.txt.bz2 >>>>> "Eli" == Eli Zaretskii writes: Eli> In what way is it not ideal? Did you want to complete on file names Eli> only when -exec was used? I thought about that, but then I realized Eli> that any other way of invoking that command cannot benefit from any Eli> completion at all. Eli> Or did you have something else in mind? Yeah, it could be context-sensitive; and also complete the options as well. I don't think it is very important. In my mind I immediately went to having a gdb-specific getopt that also had completion callbacks; funny overkill of the sort programmers are susceptible to :) Tom